Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 37291
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
ARJUN SATHYAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE POLICE CHIEF – Respondent
WP(CRL.) NO. 567 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.SANJAY, SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON, SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR, SMT.INDIRA.K.P., SRI.PAUL VARGHESE (PALLATH), SRI.KIRAN NARAYANAN, SHRI.RAHUL RAJ P., SHRI.MUHAMMED BILAL.V.A, SMT.MEERA R. MENON, SMT.BASILA BEEGAM, SMT.DEVIKA S. PRASAD
For the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.P.M.RAFIQ, P.NARAYANAN, SRI.SAJJU.S., SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN, SRI.AJEESH K.SASI, SRUTHY N. BHAT, SRI.RAHUL SUNIL, SMT.SRUTHY K.K, SHRI.SOHAIL AHAMMED, SMT.NANDITHA S.
The court mandates procedural access for claimants regarding police-held items to ensure timely disposal of such claims.
Headnote:(A) Writ of Certiorari - Procedure for Writ Petition seeking to set aside orders and claim possession of retained articles by Police - Directives regarding police custody and claimant's rights for recovery of property must be adhered to in a timely manner. (Para 1)
(B) Rights of petitioners - Writs directing police to provide protection and facilitate claim of articles lodged under their custody safeguard the petitioner's rights to possessions without delay. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claims for possession of vehicles and other articles retained by respondents, contending the need for immediate resolution and production of relevant articles.
Findings of Court:
The court permits retrieval of vehicles and advises that claims for retained mobile phones must be processed according to procedure.
Issues: The core issue concerned the administrative process regarding claim submissions for Police held items.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner must have procedural access for claims regarding articles retained by Police to minimize undue delays.
Result: Writ Petition disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for custody of items seized (Para 1) |
| 2. judicial orders regarding item retrieval and police authority (Para 2 , 3) |
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (Crl) is filed with the following prayers:
i. Call for the records relating to Crime No. 974/2023 of the Medical College Police Station;
ii. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or such other and set aside Ext.P6 order;
iii. Direct the 2nd and the 3rd respondents to take custody of the articles mentioned in Ext.P6 and produce the same before the Hon’ble JFCM Kunnamagalam.
iv. Direct the JFCM Kunnamagalam to consider the claim of the petitioner after production of the articles and release the same in accordance to law within a specific time frame.
v. Issue a Writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to provide adequate protection for the petitioner to enter in the headquarters premises of respondent company so as to take possession of his vehicles Hyundai Creta car bearing registration No. KL 08 BQ 4958 and Bullet motorcycle bearing registration no. KL
34E 2294.
vi. Issue any other Writ, Order or direction that this Hon’ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;
vii. Award Cost of this Writ Petition.
[SIC]
2. When this Writ Petition (Crl) came up for consideration on 20.12.2024, this Court passed the following order:
" I.A No.1 of 2024 The prayer in the above application is to permit the petitioner to remove his vehicles (Hyundai Creta car bearing registration No.KL 08 BQ 4958 and Bullet motorcycle bearing registration No. KL 34E 2294) lying in the premises of the respondent No.4.
2. The learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 8, who are the employees of the respondent No.4 Company, submits that they have no objection to remove the vehicles. Hence, permission is granted to the petitioner to remove the vehicles mentioned above lying in the premises of the respondent No.4.
W.P.(Crl.) 567 of 2024 Post on 23/01/2025."
3. Based on the above order, it is submitted that the vehicle has already been removed by the petitioner. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that, two mobile phones are retained by the Police. The Public Prosecutor, after getting instructions, submitted that, even though the mobile phones are in the custody of the Police, nobody filed any claim petition. If any application is filed, the same can be released. The petitioner is free to approach the Police Authorities for getting the mobile phones.
